Talk:Kawai Musical Instruments

The edit by 206.192.208.178

The edit by 206.192.208.178 contains large amounts of plagiarism, information from http://www.kawaius.com/. I think it should be reverted or changed to suit Wikipedia. A. Wang ^{(talk/contrb.)} 23:45, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

KAWAI Guitars: I have a 1966 Japanese Kawai Bass Guitar that is a copy of a Burns/Baldwin Marquee model, yet there is no mention in this article of the extensive Kawai guitar industry of the 1960's! Please correct this omission!! Thank You, TSgt Grant Koeller — Preceding unsigned comment added by 132.3.33.68 (talk) 21:50, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

More info, better tone

I'm putting a tone tag on here because the individual sentences are random, poorly worded, and make no sense. We need more info on this page...68.79.53.217 02:25, 2 May 2006 (UTC)

Any similarity to Kawaii?

What is the origin of the name Kawai? I was thinking maybe it was a play on the Japanese word for cute, Kawaii. Anyone know or care to add it to the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.107.249.52 (talk) 01:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)

Heavy BIAS and Non-Neutral

The paragraph called "Pianos," which reads: "Kawai has introduced a new technology in piano construction dubbed ABS styran and carbon. Piano actions have long been limited to wooden construction (usually maple for its inexpensive strength) as no other material has been found to be more practical or feasible. Kawai makes several claims with its ABS styran and carbon piano action construction, and many today believe this construction to be superior."

The sentence "Piano actions have long been limited..." is a very biased statement, since most serious piano manufacturers in the world consider wood to be the most important aspect of any piano, and hardly consider it "limiting." The last sentence, "...believe this construction to be superior." is also false. I'm not saying I have the citations to back my statements up, but I don't think these things should be left in as-is.

I have inserted the BIAS template. Please discuss this, I will look up some useful citations. --Brandon (talk) 14:22, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

 Comment: I'd say I'd have to agree with Brandon, this does read like an ad for Kawai, not only that the tone of the article just sounds wrong. It just doesn't have the feeling of reading an entry in an encylopedia, and is annoying at best. Copy/paste from manufacturers promotional material does not an article make. 66.244.109.166 (talk) 04:48, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

Missing is any reference to Kawai organs

Many models have been made, they are listed below. (source: http://www.kawaius-tsd.com/pages/organ_om.html). Each link on the page given shows the user manuals - and the user manuals show that the Japanese company manufactured/designed and/or licensed them.

C-600
DX80/90
DX95/105
DX100
DX200/300
DX205/305
DX500/600
DX700/800/1700/1800
DX900/19000
E65
E220
E260/360
E300
E500
E520/620
E550/650
E600
KL2
KL3/KL4
KX130/230
KX330/KX430
KX1000/2000/5000
SR2
SR3/SR4
SR5/6/7
SR50/70
T3
T5
XR150
XR300
XR600
XR7000/9000
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.221.43.78 (talk) 15:58, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

E90
E100
E105
E500
Here is another list (in Japanese, translate it in live with Google) : https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E3%83%89%E3%83%AA%E3%83%9E%E3%83%88%E3%83%BC%E3%83%B3

--AXRL (talk) 12:13, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Some corrections

The K3 does not employ analog envelopes, they are completely done in software. Also, the K5 is not the only additive synthesizer -- in fact, the K3 uses additive synthesis for waveform generation. Unlike the K5, it's a static waveform, though, i.e. there's no overtone progression over time. Instead, the waveshaping is done using a low-pass filter (SSM2044). For those interested, check out the K3 schematics (available via Kawai US and also on the web) and the corresponding discussions on the synth-diy list around 2006 (with subsequent analysis done by a guy named Plutoniq9). 84.163.149.202 (talk) 18:41, 25 September 2012 (UTC)

This page is bad

- This page does read like an advertisement and/or a brochure for Kawai. See Wikipedia is not a means of promotion

- The edit by 206.192.208.178 is full of plagiarism.

- This article does not appear to cite any reliable sources or references. Verifiability

- Also in apparent violation of Neutral Point of view

If anyone wants to have a go at completely re-writing this article, have at it. But it seems to me to be such a mess, I'm seriously considering marking it for deletion. It certainly fits more than one of the criteria. There are times when it's more work to fix something badly broken, than to start over with a clean slate so-to-speak. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.244.109.166 (talk) 08:19, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

 Comment: Often, several IP users want to re-write entire article without any consensus, and often really re-write it without any reliable sources. However, please stop it. Your proposal is not yet accepted by community. --Clusternote (talk) 09:12, 26 September 2014 (UTC)

 Comment: Yes Clusternote I agree with you 100%, completely re-writing something without any reliable sources would just be going around in circles, and leave the page no better than it currently is. Or, even possibly ending up with something worse. Verifiability, neutral point of view and community consensus is what makes a wiki good. That's why I didn't mark this page for deletion, it's better to discuss things, several people collaborating on something can often times come up with a better solution than one persons opinion. 66.244.109.166 (talk) 04:43, 27 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Kawai Musical Instruments. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150505060212/http://www.kawai.jp/product/c/electricorgan/ to http://www.kawai.jp/product/c/electricorgan/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:08, 7 December 2017 (UTC)